The Supreme Court has said that it will soon pass its order on the report of the Special Investigation Team, which reportedly had said that there was no evidence to prosecute Gujarat Chief MinisterNarendra Modi in post-Godhra communal riots of 2002.
A special bench comprising Justice DK Jain, Justice P Sathasivam and Justice Aftab Alam placed on its record the report of amicus curaie and senior counsel Raju Ramachandran.
According to sources, the amicus in his report has differed with the SIT report on some points and disagreed with its finding that there was “no prosecutable evidence” against Modi. These points of disagreement between amicus and the apex court-appointed team, headed by former CBI director RK Raghavan, could be further investigated, it said.
The Supreme Court’s order on the two reports will decide whether Modi did not act swiftly to contain the threat from the violent mob that went on a rampage immediately after the Godhra train carnage.
The apex court had asked the amicus to travel to Ahmedabad and present a report on the evidence gathered by Raghavan on the complaint of Zakia Jafari, the wife of the deceased former MP.
Dealing with SIT’s investigation report on a complaint by Zakia Jafri, who had accused Modi and 62 other politicians, bureaucrats and cops of abandoning their constitutional duty to protect lives and allowing the post-Godhra riots to go on, the amicus on March 15 had pointed out certain mismatch between the conclusion and the evidence recorded by the SIT.
Ramachandran was also asked to give his views on the affidavit of IPS officer Sanjeev Bhatt, who had accused Modi of refusing to rein in violent mob during a high-level meeting on February 27, 2002, immediately after the Godhra train burning case. In its report to the court, the SIT reportedly disbelieved Bhatt’s claim and said that the officer was not present at Modi’s residence during the time when the meeting took place.
Ramachandran visited Gujarat and interacted with several witnesses and people connected with the issue before giving his report to the court. He also dealt with an affidavit filed by a journalist supporting Bhatt’s claim that the IPS officer was present during the meeting at Modi’s residence.
The judges perused the report of the amicus and said, “It is comprehensive and covers all aspects. At the moment we are keeping it confidential”. The court turned down the plea of state government seeking a copy of the amicus report. Senior counsel Ranjit Kumar on behalf of the state government said, “A copy of the report should be furnished to us as we are the affected party.” The bench also refused to entertain the plea of SIT seeking a copy of the report. Economic Times